MoD to cut JSF numbers and 1 Carrier

[RichC]

MoD has backed down and has agreed to lose one 65,000tonne aircraft carrier and lose many of the JSF's required to operate from them.

The MoD has announced that only 50 JSF's will be acquired instead of 138. This decision was made because the Royal Navy has now backed down to the Government and agreed to only have one 65,000 tonne aircraft (The Queen Elizabeth).
The second carrier will be turned into a Helicopter assault ship to replace HMS Ocean (the largest ship in the Royal Navy currently).
A decision was also made that the UK may lease a carrier off of France (Same design as the CVF) when QE goes into refit.

So, not only will the Royal Navy be a laughing stock by having to borrow an aircraft carrier off of our long time competition (France), we will also have the largest helicopter carrier in the world.
Why on earth turn a 65,000 tonne carrier into a ship for just carrying helicopters.
The MoD will do exactly what we do now, put 3 or 4 helicopters onboard and sail it off for an exercise somewhere.

We will also lose one Trident SSBN leaving a massive gap (1/4 gap) in the deterrent.... effectively making the RN lose the deterrent for a period of time each year. The reason for having 4 (originally 5) was so we could keep up patrols have subs in refit. Now with 3, this is not possible.

So... along with that news, the Brown decision to possibly cut a couple op Sqns of GR4s and the whole Harrier force...
Say goodbye to your hobby in the next few years because we simply won't have an airforce or navy to see...

Coupled with the fact that the Government "always" disband squadrons and units when we pull out of a war zone.

[Sheff]

Well this is where I do the "I told you so" line I guess! I've been saying to people on various forums for over a year that the Carriers and JSF were unlikely to ever happen and I still stick with that view. I suspect that this is probably just the opening shot. When the implications of operating just fifty F35's and one carrier are thought-through, you can see how easy it will be to just decide to abandon the whole lot. The notion of borrowing a carrier is laughable - what government is going to be able to sell that ludicrous idea to the public?

The JSF and carrier programme will probably limp along until after the next election and then finally get dumped. The Harriers too. My main concern is whether attention will then be shifted to the Tornado GR4 force too as it would be the next obvious item on the "hit list" after everything else has gone.

You're quite right that in terms of enjoying our hobby, you have to conclude that there will be very little to see in terms of modern equipment before too long. Ultimately, I fear the FAA will be an all-helicopter force and the RAF's offensive/defensive capability will rest exclusively on the Typhoon (and the Nimrod). Sad but inevitable. We're all going to become "nostalgia junkies" before too long!

[LMP]

The fact remains however, that there is an ever growing impetus to shift from cutting frontline equipment to cutting bureaucracy - cutting the number of civil servants who as we all know, amount to greater numbers than the frontline troops! As we have seen over the last few days, the government is now struggling to make cuts, even to the TA (no disrespect guys - you are fab), and have had to back track...fortunately, with the incessant banging on about equipment for Afghanistan, poor guys being transported in coffins through Wootton Bassett, et al, it is increasingly less viable electorally to just slash frontline equipment willy nilly, as now there will usually be some journo, etc stating this is ridiculous.

Where I think the cuts would come, with regard to popular opinion, is within the nuclear deterrent. This is potentially a vote winner in the current climate. I don't believe that most British people would wish to se the deterrent entirely scrapped, but in the light of Mr Obama's musings, a reduction and resultant cost-savings, however imagined, would be electorally acceptable in the eyes of the public.

Having a bit of an inside view, there is no particular fear of wide-ranging cutbacks in frontline equipment. There maybe some mergers or rationalisations, but - and who really knows - right now at least, with an election looming, neither of the main two parties are wanting to rock the boat too much!

Rumours and counter rumours abound. Just think, the other day everyone on here was worrying that there wouldn't be a Typhoon demo in 2010. Just chill folks!

Have a great day! I'm off to do my bit for Queen and Country!

[Sheff]

The sainted Gordy claims he's going to dispose of one submarine. Sounds good but means nothing of course. Ultimately, it's about whether the UK wants to get rid of its nuclear deterrent completely and of course, that ain't gonna happen. No government would have the nerve - it's never been about defence, it's about foreign policy and without the IND we have no influence. So it stays - and probably always will.

[Sheff]

They will also take a wing of Lightning II's

I'd wait and see on that score!

[Jimbo27]

The fact remains however, that there is an ever growing impetus to shift from cutting frontline equipment to cutting bureaucracy - cutting the number of civil servants who as we all know, amount to greater numbers than the frontline troops!

Nah, doesn't work. They replaced service people with civil servants because it was cheaper, that is why there are so many civil servants. If you cut the number of civil servants, the money won't go to troops...

And where do you fly again?

[gonk]

Looks like the carriers are still to be built,


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tyne/8350294.stm

[Rainbow 6]

Hi chaps

Just thought i would add my thoughts to this:

1 I have never thought we would have the carriers or the JSF {but i wounld be sorry to see the JSF cancelled and something else purchased instead I think its a piece of expensive tat}, when there is far better things the money can be spent on, like MP's and there needs.

2 Everybody thinks that the US are our friends, and we have a special relationship with them, this is true as long as there needs and our needs are the same, what will happen when they arent? We will be on our own with a pitch fork again.

3 Forgive me for saying this but this whole thing smells like the 1920's and 1930's why do we need an army, navy, airforce, as we arent going to fight a war again, until we have another mr hitler and we have nothing to fight with. Regardless to the fact you agree with the battles we afe currently fighting we have to remember we are in fact at war and have been almost 10 years, and there isnt a sign it is going to stop anytime soon, and we should be giving these people the best equipment, and enough people to do the job that is requested of them end of story.

Rant over
Rainbow